Breaking News: Trump says he has seen evidence virus came from Wuhan Lab

[dissectingaorticaneurysm]

A virus that occurs naturally , which has the potential to jump to humans, may not necessarily jump if the vector animal dies before the jump happens. Even if we assume that the virus will eventually jump, it may jump soon after the natural mutation happens or it may take a very long time.

The Chinese scientist who is famous for studying bat coronaviruses says this virus shows a remarkable similarity to a coronavirus in horshoe bats found in caves in Yunnan province China. When she first heard about the outbreak in Wuhan, she wondered if one of the viruses her team was studying had escaped, because these horshoe bats are not found in Wuhan. She later said she checked the genomes of all the viruses they have and none of them match Sars-cov-2. She swears her lab is not the source, but then who in their right mind is going to admit they fcuked up considering the global clusterfcuk. Even if she wants to be honoest, the CCP won't let her.

The 2 Wuhan labs were studying bat coronaviruses. SARS escaped from a Beijing Lab twice. There have been virus leaks elsewhere in the World, from Marburg virus infecting researchers in Germany and Yugoslavia to smallpox escaping from a UK lab and killing a non lab worker. So the possibility this virus escaped from one of the 2 Wuhan labs is not outlandish at all.


SARS escaped Beijing lab twice
https://www.the-scientist.com/news-analysis/sars-escaped-beijing-lab-twice-50137

Most researchers think it jumped to humans through an intermediary, hence why the pangolin gained such prominence in the news. I'm not completely discounting the lab bat theory, but it adds an unnecessary layer of complication to something that can plausibly occur through the interaction of humans and captive animals.

Right now, the lab theory relies on an elaborate detective story based on supposed employee timelines. Some of it may be true, who knows. I have no doubt that the CCP regularly silences researchers at that lab if they're sharing more than they're allowed to.

 

[Andy Capp]

This is a fair point.

This doesn't disqualify the virus from escaping the lab.

All fair points.

Then given that it is naturally occurring, what says it escaped a lab rather than originating in the wild? Are people now just accepting as fact anything that sounds like it could happen?

 

[MicroBrew]

Most researchers think it jumped to humans through an intermediary, hence why the pangolin gained such prominence in the news. I'm not completely discounting the lab bat theory, but it adds an unnecessary layer of complication to something that can plausibly occur through the interaction of humans and captive animals.

Right now, the lab theory relies on an elaborate detective story based on supposed employee timelines. Some of it may be true, who knows. I have no doubt that the CCP regularly silences researchers at that lab if they're sharing more than they're allowed to.

Right, I am aware of the Pangolin theory as well. That is also a possibility at this point.

Some likely scenarios:
1) the naturally occuring virus jumped from a bat to a pangolin then to someone who handled the pangolin at the Wuhan Hunan seafood market.
2) A worker or seller or buyer at the market was infected before they came into contact with the market. At the market they infected others.
2) the virus was being studied at the 2 Wuhan labs, and accidentally infected a researcher or worker there, and managed to escape the confines of the lab. This infected person may have visited the market or infected someone who visited the market.

 

[dissectingaorticaneurysm]

Then given that it is naturally occurring, what says it escaped a lab rather than originating in the wild? Are people now just accepting as fact anything that sounds like it could happen?

I think people accept this theory so readily because the idea of secret government virus labs is so much sexier than filthy animals in cages. There are some delicious conspiratorial conclusions to be made due to the location of the lab so I can understand why it attracts so many people. People naturally feel smart if they think they're connecting dots that other people missed.

 

[The Audience]

It only really disproves the notion that it was a lab-created virus. Obviously a naturally occurring virus can still be stored in a lab.

Not the first time it would have happened either:

https://www.virology.ws/2009/03/02/origin-of-current-influenza-h1n1-virus/

There is no proof that the 1977 outbreak of h1n1 escaped a lab. Its has been argued that the most plausible theory explains that outbreak to the live vaccine trials that were being undertaken at the time in the areas of outbreak. This is consistent with the characteristics of the outbreak.

With regard to this announcement from Trump, i think its useful to consider his comments in light of this context:

US intelligence agencies under pressure to link coronavirus to Chinese labs
​

"Senior figures in the Trump administration have put pressure on US intelligence agencies to provide evidence supporting claims that the coronavirus outbreak originated in state-run laboratories in China, a report in the New York Times claims.

Intelligence analysts fear Donald Trump is looking for propaganda to be used in the escalating blame game over whether China covered up the crisis or even generated the virus in its laboratories."

The scientific evidence is increasingly pointing to a natural emergence, probably not even in Wuhan, whilst the lab escape theory is based on circumstantial evidence. I think at this point people are going to believe the theory that they want to be true rather than the one that holds most credence.

 

[MicroBrew]

There is no proof that the 1977 outbreak of h1n1 escaped a lab. Its has been argued that the most plausible theory explains that outbreak to the live vaccine trials that were being undertaken at the time in the areas of outbreak. This is consistent with the characteristics of the outbreak.

With regard to this announcement from Trump, i think its useful to consider his comments in light of this context:

US intelligence agencies under pressure to link coronavirus to Chinese labs
​

"Senior figures in the Trump administration have put pressure on US intelligence agencies to provide evidence supporting claims that the coronavirus outbreak originated in state-run laboratories in China, a report in the New York Times claims.

Intelligence analysts fear Donald Trump is looking for propaganda to be used in the escalating blame game over whether China covered up the crisis or even generated the virus in its laboratories."

The scientific evidence is increasingly pointing to a natural emergence, probably not even in Wuhan, whilst the lab escape theory is based on circumstantial evidence. I think at this point people are going to believe the theory that they want to be true rather than the one that holds most credence.

Trump was originally supportive of China, praising them for their handling . He has changed his tune since March or early April, and change of tune coincides with revelations that the Chinese government covered up the virus at first, then allowed people from China to leave the country even as they locked down Wuhan. Then the CCP blamed the US for introducting the virus to China.

 

[Seano]

Then given that it is naturally occurring, what says it escaped a lab rather than originating in the wild? Are people now just accepting as fact anything that sounds like it could happen?

Why is one theory less plausible than the other?

 

[TheGreatA]

There is no proof that the 1977 outbreak of h1n1 escaped a lab. Its has been argued that the most plausible theory explains that outbreak to the live vaccine trials that were being undertaken at the time in the areas of outbreak. This is consistent with the characteristics of the outbreak.

With regard to this announcement from Trump, i think its useful to consider his comments in light of this context:

US intelligence agencies under pressure to link coronavirus to Chinese labs
​

"Senior figures in the Trump administration have put pressure on US intelligence agencies to provide evidence supporting claims that the coronavirus outbreak originated in state-run laboratories in China, a report in the New York Times claims.

Intelligence analysts fear Donald Trump is looking for propaganda to be used in the escalating blame game over whether China covered up the crisis or even generated the virus in its laboratories."

The scientific evidence is increasingly pointing to a natural emergence, probably not even in Wuhan, whilst the lab escape theory is based on circumstantial evidence. I think at this point people are going to believe the theory that they want to be true rather than the one that holds most credence.

There's never going to be any proof that corona escaped from a lab either, even if it did, because we're dealing with operators like USSR or China who are never going to allow for any information to be released. Hell, they damn near covered up the Chernobyl incident.

I just wouldn't give these regimes the benefit of the doubt like some other people are doing. The world's been burned too many times by them. That doesn't mean that everything they do is malicious, or incompetent, but we'll never hear about it if it was.

 

[The Audience]

There's never going to be any proof that corona escaped from a lab either, even if it did, because we're dealing with operators like USSR or China who are never going to allow for any information to be released. Hell, they damn near covered up the Chernobyl incident.

I just wouldn't give these regimes the benefit of the doubt like some other people are doing. The world's been burned too many times by them. That doesn't mean that everything they do is malicious, or incompetent, but we'll never hear about it if it was.

So in the absence of proof, surely you look to the most plausible scenario based on the indications that you do have, or at the very least, withhold from making unfounded accusations that have major implications?

 

[Andy Capp]

Why is one theory less plausible than the other?

By application of Occam's Razor. There is no need for any intermediary step between occurrence of the virus in animals and human infection so every one you add makes the resulting scenario less likely.

 

[Scerpi]

There's never going to be any proof that corona escaped from a lab either, even if it did, because we're dealing with operators like USSR or China who are never going to allow for any information to be released. Hell, they damn near covered up the Chernobyl incident.

I just wouldn't give these regimes the benefit of the doubt like some other people are doing. The world's been burned too many times by them. That doesn't mean that everything they do is malicious, or incompetent, but we'll never hear about it if it was.

True or not... Let China get pissed off. They've been lying to the world the entire time and playing the WHO like a fiddle to do their bidding.

Didn't China already to try to blame Europe for the spread of COV?

 

[Andy Capp]

I think people accept this theory so readily because the idea of secret government virus labs is so much sexier than filthy animals in cages. There are some delicious conspiratorial conclusions to be made due to the location of the lab so I can understand why it attracts so many people. People naturally feel smart if they think they're connecting dots that other people missed.

I'm no virologist, but I expect it ought to be possible to use math to determine whether the lab was plausibly the origin of the virus, so I think the question is answerable. What this CT is lacking for me so far is any reason to believe this intermediary step is implied by evidence at this moment.

 

[vanillaisis]

CHY-NA

 

[Seano]

By application of Occam's Razor. There is no need for any intermediary step between occurrence of the virus in animals and human infection so every one you add makes the resulting scenario less likely.

But they have a lab right there in Wuhan that studies virus like this. Why is it less likely it was a researcher who fucked up as opposed to a fisherman or um... bat hunter?

 

[Seano]

I'm no virologist, but I expect it ought to be possible to use math to determine whether the lab was plausibly the origin of the virus, so I think the question is answerable. What this CT is lacking for me so far is any reason to believe this intermediary step is implied by evidence at this moment.

Its not necessarily that it was CREATED in a lab.

 

[Andy Capp]

There's never going to be any proof that corona escaped from a lab either, even if it did, because we're dealing with operators like USSR or China who are never going to allow for any information to be released. Hell, they damn near covered up the Chernobyl incident.

I just wouldn't give these regimes the benefit of the doubt like some other people are doing. The world's been burned too many times by them. That doesn't mean that everything they do is malicious, or incompetent, but we'll never hear about it if it was.

Well, to be clear, you can't prove a negative, so you won't be able to prove it didn't escape from there, but mathematical modeling and various other things may eventually prove that it did. If those things came back negative it would strongly suggest it did not escape a lab but that is not proof. Can't do a thing about that. But what even suggests that might be the cause of this outbreak when it's an unnecessary link in the causal chain?

 

[ShinkanPo]

Trump was originally supportive of China, praising them for their handling . He has changed his tune since March or early April, and change of tune coincides with revelations that the Chinese government covered up the virus at first, then allowed people from China to leave the country even as they locked down Wuhan. Then the CCP blamed the US for introducting the virus to China.

Yeah China started this political shit by calling out western nations for allegedly being weak or lack discipline.

It did not take long for China to capitalize politically by spreading hoax after hoax.

Its why the Trump admin responded with "China Virus".

 

[Andy Capp]

Its not necessarily that it was CREATED in a lab.

No, I didn't intend that meaning. Note the rewording in my last post, above, "origin of the outbreak", was the intended meaning. I expect that the pattern of spread is likely predictable to a certain degree depending upon whether human transmission originated among the sort of people normally shopping at these markets or someone working at a lab, or both. It may be hard to obtain the necessary data from the Chinese, mind, but a negative result will not exonerate the lab for most people anyway.

Regardless, the point is why suspect the lab when it could just as easily have occurred directly? What leads to that suspicion to begin with?

 

[Lubaolong]

As far as conspiracy theories go, the idea that covid19 escaped from a research lab seems less stupid than a lot of others things people believe in, but it still seems much less likely.

 

[The Audience]

Trump was originally supportive of China, praising them for their handling . He has changed his tune since March or early April, and change of tune coincides with revelations that the Chinese government covered up the virus at first, then allowed people from China to leave the country even as they locked down Wuhan. Then the CCP blamed the US for introducting the virus to China.

So there is a back and forth blame game going on, which makes it even more important to be guided by the evidence.